Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft To Issue Blanket License To NGOs

Posted by Soulskill on from the making-it-better dept.

itwbennett writes "Following a recent report that Russian police have used software copyright raids to seize computers of activist groups, Microsoft announced it will issue a blanket software license to nonprofit groups and journalist groups outside the US. The new blanket license should remove software piracy as an excuse for 'nefarious actions' by enforcement authorities, Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith wrote. The new license 'cuts in one swoop the Gordian knot that otherwise is getting in the way of our desired handling of these legal issues,' he said. 'The law in Russia (and many other countries) requires that one must provide truthful information about the facts in response to a subpoena or other judicial process. With this new software license, we effectively change the factual situation at hand. Now our information will fully exonerate any qualifying [nonprofit], by showing that it has a valid license to our software.'"

61 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. and the qualifier is... by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies, and says that journalists and NGOs don't have to do anything to get the license, which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

    1. Re:and the qualifier is... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies

      The article does not, because it talks about a future event ("will issue a license"). I would imagine that the text of said license would go for over 40 pages (as usual) detailing out who qualifies for what.

    2. Re:and the qualifier is... by vux984 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies, and says that journalists and NGOs don't have to do anything to get the license, which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

      This isn't the sort of situation where microsoft would be trying to weasel. More importantly, the way it worked from what I can tell, is that russian authorities needed Microsoft lawyers to essentially sign-off on the complaints against dissidents -- they'd indicate they had "reason to beleive" group-X was using priated software, and the MS-attack-lawyers would say 'raid away'.

      This change is essentially instructions from Microsoft to its own legal counsel saying if its an NGO or Journalist etc then they have a license, and not to be party to police requests.

      Strictly speaking they could instruct their lawyers to refuse to pursue cases against NGOs and so on without the license, but this 'grant of license' is:

      a) good PR

      b) makes it harder (impossible?) to for the police to build a software piracy case as long as the legal system isn't competely subverted. The Microsoft lawyer simply says "they are licensed" end of story. He doesn't have to say, something like "my client isn't interested in prosecuting a case against them". Its more thorough and complete this way. It changes from "they might be doing something wrong, but we don't care to find out" to "we are completely satisfied that they are licensed".

      which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

      As you can see they don't really need to "know they qualify". The protection is indirect - its really more a way to give microsoft's lawyers an out from having to cooperate with russian police against NGOs more than direct protection for the end user. At least that's how i read it.

    3. Re:and the qualifier is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right and by using something like that as the guide, then when Russia says Journalist X is a terrorist, M$ can say "no they aren't, they aren't on the State Department or Interpol's list."

      I'm waiting for Wikileaks to make State's list

    4. Re:and the qualifier is... by Peeteriz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, in the previous cases they don't really say "my client does not want to press the issues" - Russian government had started a criminal process, and as in most criminal process the 'victim' does not get a choice to stop the persecution, and granting a license after a request would not help either (as the violation occurred in the past, when the license was not there yet) - so if the prosecutors want to press charges, they have a valid case.

      These same issues may apply to any other country where criminal penalties apply for copyright violations.

    5. Re:and the qualifier is... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That was a strangely non-evil thing for Microsoft to do. My world is shifting.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    6. Re:and the qualifier is... by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let me help. Non-US NGOs.
      Feel better?

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    7. Re:and the qualifier is... by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Funny

      The general story could be summed up with this:

      MS Exec: Oh shit, our name is being dragged through the mud big time and we didn't really lift a finger to stop it happening. This is bad. This is costing us more money in lost reputation than it would cost us just to give everyone a license. Joe, get right on it!
      Joe: Yessir! Free copies coming right out.
      MS Exec: Also, can we put a spin on this to say that we are supporting victims, journalists and fighting organized crime and extortion?
      Joe: Sure thing boss. Spin is being added now!
      MS Exec: Righto, that's the morning done for me, time for a coffee. Hmmm, Joe, how can we squeeze some more money out of people?
      Joe: Well, with all that free time now, perhaps we can set the lawyers on the EU again? What about we put Google through another adwords privacy scandal? Maybe we just give them a week off and feed them some more children, you know it's been almost a whole month since they last tasted child flesh...
      MS Exec: Make it happen Joe. You will go a long way here someday...

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    8. Re:and the qualifier is... by Eskarel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are all sorts of non profit and not for profit organizations all over the world, just as there are all sorts of "journalists" all over the world. Microsoft wants to look good and protect small non profits and journalists from government interference. They don't want to allow NBC or Fox to call their entire staff "journalists" and get out of paying license fees, or allow larger not for profit organizations to do the same. Which is fair enough. I work for a not for profit which has revenues approaching a billion dollars a year in local currency, we don't need nor deserve free Microsoft licenses, nor does the PR guy at NBC.

      Now if they put in additional exceptions to rule out organizations like the FSF you might have a case that they're being nefarious(not that the FSF would want free Microsoft licenses, but that's largely beside the point), putting a qualification on non profit and journalist to stop huge corporations from dodging license fees on the other hand isn't a problem.

    9. Re:and the qualifier is... by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not true. Victims might have a hard time getting prosecutors to go after a case, but I made a living getting "victims" to sign statements saying that they would not testify if they went to court, and they were always, always dropped. That was many years ago, but I can't see that being any different now, at least in the USA.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    10. Re:and the qualifier is... by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm waiting for Wikileaks to make State's list

      If you're being serious, you really and truly need to seek psychiatric help. Some level of general paranoia is justified, and might even be warranted, but anyone who honestly thinks that wikileaks is going to make a terrorist list has stepped way off the beaten path.

    11. Re:and the qualifier is... by shoehornjob · · Score: 3, Funny

      OMG this could actually be the first decent thing we've seen Microsoft do in ages....or at least since they pulled the Kin off the market.

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    12. Re:and the qualifier is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm serious that if they keep poking at the US military, State Department and intelligence agencies, they'll end up on the receiving end of retaliation.

      If you think they can keep antagonizing the most powerful nation in the world and the most powerful military in history you are being delusional.

    13. Re:and the qualifier is... by gman003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is that Wikileaks has public support. The US military and intelligence services are very publicity-aware. They know that many people outside the US already consider them "evil". They know that directly attacking Wikileaks would be seen by most people as "evil". Ergo, they will not directly attack Wikileaks. They will not call in a missile strike on their servers. They will not assassinate anyone. They will probably not even risk publicity attacks, just because getting caught doing so would be more damaging than letting Wikileaks continue operating. You'll notice that they still haven't called Wikileaks "evil" or "un-American". They've said that they violate laws (true) and that their operations endanger soldiers and civilians (also true).

      What they WILL do is try to shut down their sources. Because, while everyone stands up for Wikileaks, very few people are actively protecting the leakers themselves. So, the US military will beef up its IT security, and bump up personnel security checks, and slow the number of leaks that get out. They can't get 100%, but they can make it difficult for Wikileaks to get intel on them, at which point Wikileaks will probably find some other organization to use as its big target.

    14. Re:and the qualifier is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The public doesn't know who wikileaks is.

      Besides, does the US Government really care what the world public thinks? I think US Foreign Policy since 1964 shows the US really doesn't care.

      "Everyone" is not standing up for Wikileaks, hell even big transitional media outlets like Wired and Gawker are pointing at problems with Wikileaks and it's public face.

    15. Re:and the qualifier is... by c0lo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have no idea what an NGO actually is, do you.

      It doesn't matter what I understand, and it doesn't matter what MS would understand (if it is not phrased carefully). What matters it what the Russians will understand or choose to understand in the context of their legislation.

      As the parent post noted: while MS intentions (in this instance) may be well meant, it just doesn't mean they'll have the desired effect: not without due care being paid.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    16. Re:and the qualifier is... by Lillebo · · Score: 2, Funny

      That was a strangely non-evil thing for Microsoft to do. My world is shifting.

      Not so strange, it's just step 3 in their "How to fix our public image and steal back clients from Google" strategy.

      1. Announce we love Open Source.
      2. Help with some Linux bug fixes.
      3. Fight some anti democracy thingy in Russia or China.
      4. Get massive press coverage from 1, 2 and 3.
      5. ???
      6. Profit

  2. No price or freedom by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not criticising this move. It's the start of the right thing to do. But lets not forget that although the price will be zeroed, the NGO's will still not be able to see what the software is doing, will still not be able to change the software.

    NGO's should use free software.

    --
    Expert in software patents or patent law? Contribute to the ESP wiki!
    1. Re:No price or freedom by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most opposition NGOs in Russia are routinely harassed by the government while trying to expose many cases of corruption and widespread violation of human rights. Some (albeit, thankfully, very few so far) are imprisoned, others are beaten by thugs who are then conveniently never found by police.

      The issue of "being able to change the software" simply doesn't enter into the picture - I mean, do you seriously think these folk have the time to submit kernel patches? For most of them, computer is just a tool to do what they think of as their civic duty, one among many other such tools.

    2. Re:No price or freedom by antifoidulus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention increased protection from prying eyes. If I was criticizing a government known for harassing its opponents I sure as shit wouldn't be using something as insecure as Windows.

      --
      Monstar L
    3. Re:No price or freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to mention increased protection from prying eyes. If I was criticizing a government known for harassing its opponents I sure as shit wouldn't be using something as insecure as Windows.

      Good call. Because there's absolutely no way in hell that the Russian government has people who could hack backdoors into open source, compile it, and surreptitiously install it onto rooted Linux systems.

    4. Re:No price or freedom by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know this isn't you, but some people care about getting shit done and have no interest in dicking around in the guts of their software.

      For most tasks, that includes me, and I've been a programmer since childhood.

    5. Re:No price or freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but what compiler did you use?

    6. Re:No price or freedom by Score+Whore · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But did you build your OS via tapping bits onto the SATA bus with a paperclip? Otherwise you have no idea what your OS is putting in there. See Ken Thompson Reflections on Trusting Trust.

    7. Re:No price or freedom by exomondo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Root privileges are merely a means to an end. An end such as installing a keylogger, re-building the password manager to silently forward you any future stored passwords, etc...

      It's no different than Windows

      I think that's his point.

      (other than the fact that its harder to actually root a linux box, rooting windows is pretty trivial)

      In the old days yes, now not so much. It's a lot of social engineering these days.

    8. Re:No price or freedom by oatworm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're forgetting ability. There's a wide gulf between "there's something in the guts of the software interfering with our ability to 'get shit done'" and "I know where to find it and how to disable it".

      However, that's not what the story is about. Instead, foreign police forces didn't need a "government backdoor" - instead, they'd use an investigation into a potential technical legal violation (think of how Al Capone was ultimately convicted of tax evasion and you'll get the idea), ask MS to provide enough info to ostensibly check for it ("Hey, we think this org is using pirated software."/"Okay, here's what you'll need to know to check for that."), then raid all of the computers in said org, hold them long enough to disrupt operations and grab everything off of them, then be done with it. Honestly, you don't need root/local admin access when you can carry the boxes out of the office by hand. Now, MS' official policy when foreign law enforcement calls is to simply say, "No, they're not pirates - we give free licenses to all non-profits" and force law enforcement to come up with some other arcane law (of which there are always plenty) to apply against the org of their choice.

      It won't really affect anything, of course, but kudos to MS for not playing along.

    9. Re:No price or freedom by TheSpoom · · Score: 3, Funny

      I trust only the ABACUS I WHITTLED from a tree I GREW MYSELF!

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    10. Re:No price or freedom by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know the scenes in WWII movies (e.g. Casablanca) where the resistance or their allies provide bogus "authorization" papers to the Good Guys so they can evade arrest by the Nazis? That's kinda what MS is doing here. They're trying to be non-evil; give them credit for it.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    11. Re:No price or freedom by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good call. Because there's absolutely no way in hell that the Russian government has people who could hack backdoors into open source, compile it, and surreptitiously install it onto rooted Linux systems.

      I agree with this: Russian law enforcement and government folks don't need copyright laws and Microsoft to hack or harass dissenters. But I'll go further: they don't generally need back doors at all, because they have no problem with kicking down the front door and dragging citizens out into the street, or simply shooting people in the head. Seriously, they act outside the law and do what they think needs to be done, without the constraints they we in the West are used to. Capitalist corruption and totalitarianism have taken over for the Leninist corruption and totalitarianism that we grew up reading about.

      Got money in Russia, you can buy influence and protection. Question the corruption or try to change the status quo, you'll find yourself in a world of pain and trouble, if you keep breathing that is. The situation may not typically be as bloody as the drug-infused battlegrounds in Mexico that we in the US keep reading about, but you'd better know what you're doing if you challenge any level of government in Russia.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  3. So let me get this straight... by Pikoro · · Score: 3, Funny

    In soviet russia, software licenses you?

    --
    "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    1. Re:So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, Microsoft protects you from government.

  4. Re:It works for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, what you're saying is, this is a win-win scenario for both Microsoft and non-US NGOs. Don't they teach win-win being a wonderful thing at school?

  5. Re:hmm... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

    It will be interesting, but it only lasts until 2012. It's hard to believe they would extend it longer.

    Apparently it's an interim measure while NGOs learn that they can take part in an existing program involving "donation" of software to non-profits. End result is effectively the same, as you get free licenses, but donations are to a specific org, whereas this is meant to be a blanket license to shield everyone from abuse right here and now.

  6. Re:What about here? by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can you cite evidence of any "dissident" groups in the US that have been busted for software piracy? This is a case of Microsoft trying to "do the right thing", they should be applauded for their efforts, not criticized.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  7. Re:Weird terminology by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Am I supposed to know what a "blanket software license" is?

    If American English is your primary language, yes.
    If not, know that here in America, we license our electric blanket software (the programs that tell a blanket when its getting too hot). Sure, some hip nerds install Linux on theirs so they can literally feel the system load, but most people just think of electric blankets as appliances.

  8. Re:What about here? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So far as my limited understanding of US copyright law goes, the government cannot sue someone for copyright infringement on behalf of the rights owner; the latter actually has to initiate the process. In Russia (and a few other places), this is not the case - copyright infringement (even small-scale) is a criminal matter, and prosecuted as such by the state, with or without cooperation from the rights owner. This is what made possible the abuse in this particular case. It's actually hinted at in TFS:

    The law in Russia (and many other countries) requires that one must provide truthful information about the facts in response to a subpoena or other judicial process. With this new software license, we effectively change the factual situation at hand.

    The situation before was like this: say, Russian police gets a tip from "above" to harass a particular NGO. They raid the offices on some premise (it's not US, so there are many ways to legitimize such a raid) and confiscate a bunch of PCs. They then subpoena MS to testify whether software on those PCs, in which MS holds copyrights, is legitimately owned or copyright-infringing. Chances are high that at least a few boxes would have something unlicensed on them - and if they don't, you can always plant it there (rumor it is that it's precisely what they did in the case in question), so MS says "yes, some of that is not licensed". Police then takes it to state prosecutor which uses it as the grounds for the copyright infringement case.

    The whole point of this blanket license is so that, if govt tries that trick again in the future, MS can say that all software in question is legally used, without even having to look at it. Hence there would be no grounds for a lawsuit.

    Though something tells me that they'll just start looking for pirated Photoshop etc from now on.

  9. Re:Linux and BSD ... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The irony is that you can still end up in court for running Linux on PCs without "licenses", because the police don't understand it, and will only take those shiny holographic stickers as a proof that your software is "licensed". It's boneheaded, but some Russian Linux distribution companies have since started selling special stickers for Linux just for this purpose.

  10. Ah fuck! by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Funny
    I wish I could delete the above comment. I thought I was replying someone else here on Digg.

    Weird shit has been happening to me since I started taking Ambien!

    --
    RIP America

    July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

  11. Microsoft treats non-profits very well by dave562 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I used to work for a 501c3 non-profit and we got ridiculously good deals on Microsoft licensing. Everything from server licenses, to Office suite, Exchange and the whole Back Office line of products (SQL, Sharepoint, etc). I know that our Office licenses (for the Professional edition) were in the neighborhood of $30 a piece. That included a provision that allowed the users to have a copy of the program on their home computer as well.

    1. Re:Microsoft treats non-profits very well by slashbaby · · Score: 3, Informative

      Second this.

      I work for the Canadian branch of an international NGO, and MS almost throws software at us - we recently were donated $50 000 MSRP of software from MS. We paid $2300 in "administration fees" - which pay for two years of Software Assurance, downloads, customer service, tech support, etc.

      Most software companies are generous to registered NGOs.

      We do use *nix for many things, most of our network infrastructure is *nix. It just makes sense. But for the users, who know Office and Windows, we can't justify the lost time and training in switching to a something else when there is next to no price benefit - our software cost per workstation is ~$50 every 4 years.

      I do feel bad for being a MS propagation machine, but they do make it pretty darn easy.

  12. Re:Tax breaks by blagder · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you are misinterpreting that paragraph; and thus not giving Microsoft their due credit.

    It is saying that Microsoft already does run a ‘donation’ program to NGOs that likely does allow them tax deductions at no cost. But that’s not what this is. By instantly creating a license that any NGO can use for free; they cannot claim a deduction. For a deduction, they would have to get the NGO/journalist to go through specific channels so that they could document the ‘donation’. And that of course if why they want to move people to their donation program.

    This is talked about in a bit more detail in the Microsoft blog entry that announced it. I would expect this to make it a bit more difficult to get NGOs to use their donation program since the motivation for jumping through the hooks is less.

    This is a fantastic program and Microsoft should be commended for it. Even on Slashdot.

    Now, getting deductions for software (or other IP) donations in general is ridiculous and something that governments should reconsider. Any business deduction where they can control the value of the donation by their pricing is somewhat shady. But this license does not seem to be taking advantage of that.

  13. So how does one qualify? by brianary · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Which organizations? How will Microsoft define "journalist"? Will bloggers qualify? Does the journalist, the publication, and/or the group need to be outside the US?

    Will they get a license key and support?

    "Whatever the circumstances of the particular cases the New York Times described, we want to be clear that we unequivocally abhor any attempt to leverage intellectual property rights to stifle political advocacy or pursue improper personal gain."

    So very naive. Do they think they are getting IP enforcement externalities for free?

  14. Re:No. by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nope. Attitudes like ours is what started the American and French revolutions.

    If you are being abused by the corporate aristocracy then perhaps it's time to overthrow the aristocracy.

    You don't even have to believe in the whole "software freedom" thing to realize that the whole software license management thing is a huge burden and bother.

    Being an accidental pirate as a corporation is much like being in violation of some obscure subtle law that most people (including actual cops) wouldn't recognize as a "federal offense".

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  15. Re:hmm... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They won't have to register though, what will happen is they will simply say to that they are fully licensed until 2012.

    Okay, point taken on that. But then a pirate user who suddenly becomes legal will probably start using things like Automatic Updates for the convenience, and then becomes visible, to a degree, to Microsoft.

    FWIW, I'm mostly Linux guy so it doesn't bother me either way - but I know enough about MS to know they don't give anything away free without there being some alterior motive.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  16. NGOs should change to Linux by bdwoolman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have argued that NGOs should change to Linux to avoid this very vulnerability. Some have even done so at my suggestion. I suspect at root that with this move Microsoft is parrying this very trend. And looking good while doing so. Of course NGOs should still use Linux for many reasons. Especially since much of the pirate software on their boxes is not MS and this still leaves them vulnerable. Most work done by NGOs can be accomplished by FOSS. Linux and NGOs are a natural fit.

    Of course a bully needs only the weakest excuse so the official harassment will continue despite whatever OS or resources are used.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
  17. Re:It works for them... by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MS gets a free sales bump to feel good organizations. Organizations get free software, the FSB gets to slide in all the quality malware they like.
    Young campaigners are exposed to MS products telling their friends and family ... win win win for all. The CIA gets a longer list of front organizations and useful idiots to incubate for 'color revolutions'.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  18. Educational institutions too by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For instructional use, they give us software for free. We decided to just go and get their software assurance pack (more or less a site license for their software for any use) and it is extremely cheap on a yearly basis. Students get massive discounts, and the get to keep the license when they leave and use it for any purpose, including for profit.

    MS and Adobe are actually two of the best companies for cutting educational institutions a break. Some of the engineering companies... Well they are assholes :P.

  19. Re:Blanket License? by imakemusic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, no. The other Linus.

    --
    Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  20. And that probably goes double for NGOs by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    NGOs are full of starry idealist types usually, but they are busy being idealistic about their given cause. Often it is something really important, like distributing food to starving people, or vaccinating against deadly, but preventable diseases or shit like that. They do not have time to get all starry eyed about your chosen cause as well, software freedom in this case. They can't go and spend the time to become programmers just so they can "see what the software is doing."

    Linux users may not like to admit the fact but in an enterprise setting, Microsoft products get shit done. For some people, that is all that matters, in particular if what they are doing matters more.

  21. well that was odd by phrostie · · Score: 2, Informative

    I may never have a reason to say this ever again so, well done!

  22. Re:No. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nope. Attitudes like ours is what started the American and French revolutions.

    The French Revolution rapidly degenerated. It got really, really stinky. The American Revolution wasn't really a revolution. More of an anti-colonial thing.

  23. Re:hmm... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not that I'm an MS fan but people who pirate software these days when there are usually very good legally free alternatives are hypocrites who deserve all they get.

    What makes them hypocritical? To be hypocritical they'd have to start their own software company and loudly complain when other people pirated their product.

  24. Did the thermostats in Hell just drop? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never thought I'd be posting this on Slashdot, but an unbelievable move for good by Microsoft. It's good to see them take a stand against repression. Now, I hope these same ethics get cemented in all their business processes.

    1. Re:Did the thermostats in Hell just drop? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It only covers organizations that fight against OTHER countries' governments, thus including all CIA front groups. American NGOs still have to pay for Microsoft software.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  25. Re:No. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would respond but my copy of Windows Server is holding my family hostage.

  26. Interesting, but... by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's an interesting concept, but won't government agents with an agenda simply look to non-Microsoft software as an excuse for a raid?

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Interesting, but... by jc42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... won't government agents with an agenda simply look to non-Microsoft software as an excuse for a raid?

      It might mean a change in excuse by the Russian cops. After all, if you're running linux or *BSD or other free software, you have a license to run it. Just keep copies of the GPL and other appropriate licenses around to show people.

      Of course, this won't really stop the raids and theft of computers. It'll just mean that "suspected software piracy" won't be the excuse it has been. The government's creative types will think up other wordings.

      It is sorta funny that the Russian cops don't seem to be raiding the botnet operators and other spam operations, which seem to be headquartered in Russia in great numbers these days. I wonder why that might be?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  27. Re:and the qualifier is... the F_CKING GOVERNMENT! by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Huh? If Microsoft is granting the license, how are they not in complete control over what entities qualify?

  28. Nice try by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I generally have little good to say about Microsoft, but I'll give them a bit of thanks here. It was a nice try. We'll stop there though, because Russia does not really need to act under the guise of protecting Microsoft to crack down on dissenters. They will continue to harass, arrest, and intimidate dissenters and protesters as much as they please, and find some BS justification after the fact, if they feel a need to justify their actions at all. They are certainly more accountable today than during Soviet times, but not by much, and corruption runs rampant at all levels. So this is a nice gesture by Microsoft, but let's not get carried away - it will not serve to protect or promote free speech in Russia.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  29. Oh okay, here is the evil bit by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How else could NGO's and such avoid license fees and license nightmares? Why, use opensource. Install linux. Free too.

    So to avoid people shifting to an OS that doesn't get you raided, MS offers its software free to a market that isn't exactly rolling in cash anyway. Kinda like the free licenses to schools. The first one is always free.

    Now this IS a nice thing MS is doing, IF it doesn't come with the usual hooks, but it is also a good business move.

    Mind you, for MS this is amazing :) Something that is good for them AND a lot of people. It is going to be one hell of a cold day.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Oh okay, here is the evil bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How else could NGO's and such avoid license fees and license nightmares? Why, use opensource. Install linux. Free too.

      How, exactly, does this prevent a raid looking for pirated Microsoft stuff? The authorities won't find anything, but without the blanket license, the pretext still exists.